0:00 Introduction 1:20 Jake’s claims 4:00 Imam Subki's Tabaqat al-Shāfi'iyya al-Kubra 5:08 What Imam Subki really said 8:59 Position of the mujassima (literalists) 11:00 Summary of Imam Subki's position 11:44 Imam Juwayni al-Aqeedah an-Nithaamiya 14:20 Examples of Ta'wil 16:36 "My nation will never agree upon misguidance" 17:36 The Salaf vs modern-day Najdi-Salafis 20:30 Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali 22:28 Bidah of Mu'tazalia 25:45 Extreme Hanbalis 32:28 Abu Hanifa on the Jahmis and Mujassima 34:17 Tafweed Maa'na - the way of the Salaf 35:05 Allah has NO modality (Kayf) 35:45 Allah has a Hand? 36:40 Imam Ahmed is free from Tajsim 38:09 Wahhabis are upon Muqatil ibn Sulayman 40:30 2 Hadith experts at the time of Imam Ahmed 41:23 #1 Harb al-Kirmani 43:26 Allah has a limit? 44:40 Aboveness of Allah according to the Salaf 46:20 #2 Uthman ad-Darimi 47:25 Affirming movement for Allah? 50:42 Ibn Asakir 52:20 Extremes among the Hanbalis 54:00 Ibn Shahin defending Imam Ahmed against extreme Hanbalis 55:13 Ibn Taymiyya is not upon the way of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal 56:11 Imam Al-Dhahabi criticising the literalists 59:00 Forbidden to say Allah descends with His Being 1:00:00 Just narrate the Hadith as it is 1:00:50 Ibn Kathir 1:01:20 How Salafis explain Istiwa (rising) 1:02:32 How Ibn Kathir explains Istiwa (rising) 1:06:00 Ibn Kathir refutes the literalists 1:08:18 Summarising the position of the Sunni Scholars 1:09:28 Imam al-Laqani (later Ash'ari) 1:10:32 Explaining Tawil and Tafweed 1:11:54 Conclusion
Jake went from one extreme to another. He was a hadith rejector for almost a decade. He felt bad for rejecting the hadiths of the Prophet (saw). So,now he’s a complete literalist.
Who are you to question shaykh Jake 😂 He is a intelligent quranist and most importantly he had 3 meetings with uthmaan farooq at aim conferences He is extremely qualified 😂
Names won't get you anywhere. What did Imam Malik say? Did he make tafwid of the ma'ana? Everyone knows his state istawa Ma'lum wa kafiya majhul. Is this tafwid bil ma'ana. You either don't understand or slandering or both
The thing is Jake needs to get checked in person. He doesn’t have the qualifications to be discussing these topics. He’s above his pay grade. If you notice, he doesn’t ever mention who his shuyūkh are who taught him nor does he display Arabic comprehension to know what is actually being said. We live in a time where people give too much weight to these figures and fund their misguidance while they enjoy their life in Morocco.
I knew Jake was going into the extreme a long time ago. Jake's specialty is Trinity vs Tawheed and not the Islamic sciences. Thats not what Jake went to school for.
Just a suggestion shaykh, maybe you could cut up the video in different parts. A hour long video with a lot of different masa'il is a lot to consume, nevertheless, I am going to watch it all lol. barakallah fik
slm 3lykm. I came into Islam alhamdulillah through the dawah of atharis. Hence, I found myself inclined to the athari position as I learned. The "word for word" approach of Imam ibn Hanbal resonated with me, especially coming from a Christian background where people are well-known to read their own words into their scripture. At the same time, I never understood the claim that this (ibn Hanbal's) approach was synonymous with applying some sort of "literal meaning", especially when it comes to ayaat which are ambiguous. It seems to me that a literal meaning, sometimes can only come from interpretation of the words to begin with. But maybe I'm wrong. I wouldn't consider myself an Ashari, and at the same time I wouldn't consider the views of the Asharis on MANY topics to be far from how I understand things already. I've learned alot from you, so thank you for sharing your research with us very minor students of knowledge. barakAllahu fik.
I know one thing Asharis are (shafii,maliki, Hanbeli) Maturidies are (Hanafi) 4 madhab for Amal( action,deeds). 2 madhab for Aqeedah (Beliefs). Those are Ahlul sunnah Wal Jemaa. Atharies are Neo Khawarij/Salafis Ahlul bidaa.
@trappedinexistence Were sahaba time . I also mention Hanafi which is tabi'in. Those madzhab are follower of Rasulillah and his companion(sahaba). We are calling them Ahlul sunnah wal jamaa. Out of 73 sects (sava'idul Adzam) Firqa'i Najiya the main road. others is Ahlul bidaa.( Mujassima,Mushabbiya,Mutazila,Murjiaa,shia, etc.) Neo Khawarij nowadays the calling themselves salafi which covering Khawarij aqeedah but they dont Real salafis they are Neo Khawarij/Wahabism movement which defently Ahlul bidaa.
@ph0uad I also mentioned Hanbeli nowadays Hanbeli divided in two one of them Ashari which okay. The other one is athari/Neo Khawarij Wahabism which is Ahlul bidaa.
@@BESIKTASON I know that modern salafis are misguided. they reject classical sunni scholars on too many issues which takes them out of sunni orthodoxy. the editing of classical works is another issue (eg. tafseer ibn kathir darussalam version is missing things the najdis don't like). my question is, how can you call pre-ashari/maturidi people ashari/maturidi? that doesn't make sense. the first communities were neither of them until scholars had to come up with those views. it's like calling the havariyoon trinitarian or marcian when those views came much later.
"We affirm the apparent.." is such a deception. They do Ta'wil when it pleases them because it's ambiguous on what they mean by "apparent". Example 54:14, where they say it means 'two eyes'. Baqallani didn't affirm 'two eyes', he used the dual form with 'eye' and 'eyes' by each of the 2 attributes being distinct as he did with yadayn('two hands") as one attribute.
here is the full Arabic text of Surah Al-Qamar 54:12-14: **12.** وَفَجَّرْنَا الْأَرْضَ عُيُونًا فَالْتَقَى الْمَاءُ عَلَىٰ أَمْرٍ قَدَرٍ **13.** وَحَمَلْنَاهُ عَلَىٰ ذَاتِ أَلْوَاحٍ وَدُسُرٍ **14.** تَجْرِي بِأَعْيُنِنَا جَزَاءً لِمَنْ كَانَ كُفِرَ أَعْيُن (ʾa‘yun): This is the plural form of عَيْن (ʿayn), which means "eye". The form "أَعْيُن" is a broken plural (جمع تكسير), often used for words referring to body parts or objects. نَا (nā): This is a possessive suffix (ضمير المتكلمين), meaning "our" or "ours". So, "أَعْيُنِنَا" means "our eyes."
Thank you barrakallahu fik The sons of Karramiyyah if they don't slander the Imams of Ahlul Sunnah nobody will listen to them Jake became a complete wahhabitard, I hope he's getting paid well otherwise he's making himself look dumb for no reason 😂😂😂
Sir my one and only simple question... With what authority you take meaning of hand, eyes, face and shin to be metaphorical/simile. DO you have any explicitly injunctions from prophet alihisalam or his companions that his nuzul or other sifaat which came in Quran and sunnah are to be taken metaphorically
In regards to the hadith of Bukhari and Muslim wherein the attribute of Allah ‘dhik (literal meaning: laughing)’ has been mentioned, Imam Bukhari is quoted as saying that it means, “Allah’s mercy.” (Bayhaqi, Kitab al-Asma’ wa ‘l-Sifat, p: 433). In Surat al-Qalam, Allah Most High says, “On the Day when the saq [literal meaning: shin] will be exposed…”. (Qur’an 68:42). Likewise, in the hadith of Bukhari, it is stated, “Our Lord will expose his saq [literal meaning: shin].” Many scholars from the salaf and khalaf; such as Abdullah ibn Abbas, Mujahid and Qatada interpret the term ‘saq’ with various different explanations. (See: Imam al- Bayhaqi’s Al-Asma’ wa ‘l-Sifat, p: 323). Imam Ibn Kathir (Allah have mercy on him) relates in his masterpiece Al-Bidaya wa ‘l-Nihaya quoting Imam al-Bayhaqi from his Manaqib through a sound chain that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Allah have mercy on him) interpreted the verse, “And your Lord shall come” (Qur’an 89:22) to mean, “His recompense (thawab) shall come.’ (Al-Bidaya wa ‘l-Nihaya, 10/327)
@abyrahman6610 Salafis says "we must take whatever is revealed as it is and should not invest the human intellect in deducting the True nature or kayfiyah of Asma o sifaat. They say we leave the actual meaning onto Allah and only accept whatever is written without going into it's Howness but WHEREAS JAHMIS, ASHARIS AND MATURIDIS MATURIDIS ATTRIBUTE ALLAH WITH THIER OWN WHIMS OF WHATEVER THEY THINKS FIT" So, how would you respond to this
@@ahlussuffiya4225 As I understand, Asharis/ Maturidis accept the apparent words, not the apparent meanings. They consign the meanings to Allah (SWT).i.e. they believe in the revealed words as and that they have a meaning but only Allah (SWT) knows the meanings. Whereas the Salafis say they know the meanings (which are the literal meanings) but don't know the howness. Salafis are in fact going one step further by giving the literal meanings and therefore not stopping where Allah (SWT) and his Prophet (SAW) stopped at. These words should just be recited and not explained and not translated, that's the way of the Salaf.
Brother it’s simple the Najdis say it’s a real hand. Where in the Quran Sunnah does it say real/haqiqi and when you ask for an explanation they say we know what a hand is 😢
Lol Imam Harb Al Kirmani and Imam Ad Darimi both are students of Imam Ahmad😂 so the Ashairah believes Students of Ahmad are Mujassima?😂 I never saw Asharis criticising Bishr Al Marisi
I used to believe in this salafi nonesense. Alhamdulilah Allah guided me away from it into the real tradition and position of imam Ahmad ibn hanbal. It's a hard skin to shed wallahi this poison called salafiyyah Alhamdulilah I am now teaching my family the misguidance we were on and to make real taqleed of imam Ahmad in fiqh and to follow the real books of aqeedah in the madhab and to throw away that garbage called kitab al tawheed
There is no justice between the Salafis and the Ashaaira. Instead of going to the narrations of the salaf, they will make hour long lectures quoting the khalaf. This brother here is banging on about the salaf being majority Tafwid proponents, while none of the Ashaaira were Tafwid only. So basically his whole lecture refutes the Ashaa'ira along with the Salafis. If the majority of the salaf did Tafwid, then why are we following Ta'wil. Why will the Ashaaira not stick the majority of salaf and stick with Tafwid. Why?
Go a step further. You will find tafwid and tawil very early on but not to an extreme. When one goes to extremes one falls into error. May Allah help us
Ask them about hands , eyes , feet, ...the honest ones will say a real , literal foot ...or they may some what else is hand other than a hand . Beware some are sneaky and will play with words . May Allah help us. Not that the other side is perfect but you would be shocked by statements of their famous scholars and things hidden in their books.
Sheikh, how do you explain Quran 40:36 and 40:37, where Pharaoh instructed Haman to build a tower so that he can look into the God of Moses because he thinks Moses is a liar? Is this not clear proof that Allah is above the heavens and the throne as this is what Musa preached to Pharaoh? I just say that Allah is literally above the throne befitting his Majesty.
@@ImranKhan-pn4lf Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh in all his igno-rance, thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh. Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing His Path. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety and not by distance like pharoah thinks.
@@ImranKhan-pn4lf Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh in all his i.g.n.o-ra.n.c.e, thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh. Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing the path of guidance that leads to Allh. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety towatds him, and not by distance like pharoah. thinks.
Pharaoh LA thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh. Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing His Path of Guidance. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety, and not by distance like the pharoah's thinks.
@ Thank you for your response but I am not convinced with that explanation. Pharaoh wouldn’t have attempted to see Allah SWT if Musa hadn’t said that Allah is above the heavens. This is aqeedah of Musa AS. 37:99 (Quran) has nothing to do with refuting Allah being above the throne.
9:00 The apparent meaning is understanding the text as it came, without knowing the reality, not reinterpreting it because you're insecure about what your greek-studied buddies will call you. We don't care for the labels you give Muslims who have this methodology [Imam abu hanifa, Imam malik, Imam Ahmad etc] because this methodology is authentic to the righteous generations. Jake doesn't need to include in the quote he gave anything from before this part of the book because the other part is completely irrelevant. You implied that he skipped it and as a result *missed some serious important context*... Okay, well show us, tell us, tell us what Jake had missed from the quote that would change the message. Because as it stands, what you just did seems more like charlatanry.
So you agree that you worship a god just like Hindus worshipping vishnu krishna etc.. Even they too have some saught of hands, eyes, face and shin. So you agree that you are an anthrmorphist... So you agree that you worship an entity which has two physical hands that too both on right side in an ugly manner, and who is limited by just two physical literal eyes, uncovers his shin by lifting his garments and who continously does ding dong ding dong.. Up and down motion (Nouzbillah min zalik) and finally all his hands, eyes, body everything will be perished except face... Wow.. What a cinamatic literal god you have.. Congrats then you are no different than a Hindu now
Show me one Athar where these Imams you claim interpreted the ambiguous attributes of Allah in the literal meaning. Show me one because there are countless evidence the Salaf only practising tafwidh and tawil. Literal interpretation is a form of interpretation and the path of the Mujassimah. Avoiding searching a meaning is tafwidh al-ma'na. You are contradicting yourself and sound ignorant.
Saying you accept the apparent but then making an interpretation that the apparent doesn’t exist and there is no meaning to it isn’t accepting it without interpretation. Its the complete opposite and worse.
Good try kid ibn Taymiya affirmed Holy Ghost son father to god go ask ur ulama too Christians found out on social media used it against Muslim recently
@@Unknown.855seriously wake up now you’re just being foolish. You know that’s not what we believe, it’s what you wish we believe, so you don’t have to concede that your beliefs are corrupted.
11:33 Plain text reading of Quran leads to tajsim(!) ie something sinful I think it is your categorisation of sins that's the problem, not the plain text reading Just as you, with your pseudo rational idea of temporality entailing createdness, are forced to say Allah does not act temporally, despite the Quran explicitly showing that He does (created jinn before mankind) and early scholars like Bukhari affirming uncreated temporality for Allah. Truly i tell you that the problem is with your categories of heresy/sin Allah does not have a body, nor is He created, nevertheless Allah has 2 hands [as affirmed by Abul Hasan al ashari, Abu Hanifa, Al Tabari etc] and acts temporally. We hear and we obey
@@abdulkenyseid8108 Yes, just as the mercy of Allah is different to our mercy [created mercy] Bukhari affirmed temporality for Allah saying His new occurrences aren't like that of creation's (they are uncreated). I follow captain Bukhari
@@idrea43 you will not get any problem with Allah's mercy just by claiming it is indivisible(not a collection of mercies) from Allah. but temporality is different topic.
11:19 Do you know how ridiculous you sound "may Allah curse you for taking the Quran, that's revealed with an apparent meaning and no interpretation given, upon its apparent meaning! Here, take these ta'weeli interpretations that we have derived from our own minds without any prophetic/divine authority instead!" Who gets to decide which interpretation is the incorrect kufri one and which isn't? You say your supposedly rational scholars [whose conclusions seem to have been inspired by a deep seated insecurity from dealing with non muslims], we say the Quran itself. When it says He rose over the throne, it means what it's saying, while the howness is unimaginable. In howness it is transcendent, not in meaning. Tanzih is slightly more respectable, but it's still illegitimate at times. How can you say Allah is entirely transcendent, when the prophet himself compares the meaning of the mercy of Allah to the mercy of a woman with a child (saying Allah has more mercy)? The meanings can certainly be known. How can you say Allah is entirely transcendent, when the prophet himself gestures with his hand what Allah will do to the heaven and earth with His hand? Clenching and unclenching it. The meanings can certainly be known
Narration of Certain Ahadith: Someone said, “What about one who narrates the hadith, ‘Allah created Adam on His form,’ and that ‘Allah will unveil His shank on the Day of Resurrection,’ and that ‘He will put His hand into Jahannam and bring whomever He wills out of it’,” and he [Malik] rejected them strenuously, and forbade anyone to narrate them. Someone said, “Ibn ‘Ijlan has narrated it.” He said, “He was not one of the people of fiqh.” Malik did not reject the hadith of ‘descent' nor the hadith of ‘laughter’. Someone said, “What about the hadith that ‘the Throne shook because of the death of Sa’d’?” He said, “It should not be narrated, and what call has a man to narrate that when he sees what danger it contains?” ...Kitab Al Jami'
So you agree that you worship a god just Hindus worshipping vishnu krishna etc.. Even they too have some saught of hands, eyes, face and shin. So you agree that you are an anthrmorphist... So you agree that worship a entity which has two physical hands that too both on right side in an ugly manner, and who is limited by just two physical literal eyes, uncovers his shin by lifting his garments and who continously does ding dong ding dong.. Up and down motion (Nouzbillah min zalik) and finally all his hands, eyes, body everything will be perished except face... Wow.. What a cinamatic literal god you have.. Congrats then you are no different than a Hindu now
![Felix "Unfair" | [Stray Kids : SKZ-PLAYER]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Oswujxm2Ag0/mqdefault.jpg)
0:00 Introduction
1:20 Jake’s claims
4:00 Imam Subki's Tabaqat al-Shāfi'iyya al-Kubra
5:08 What Imam Subki really said
8:59 Position of the mujassima (literalists)
11:00 Summary of Imam Subki's position
11:44 Imam Juwayni al-Aqeedah an-Nithaamiya
14:20 Examples of Ta'wil
16:36 "My nation will never agree upon misguidance"
17:36 The Salaf vs modern-day Najdi-Salafis
20:30 Ibn Rajab al-Hanbali
22:28 Bidah of Mu'tazalia
25:45 Extreme Hanbalis
32:28 Abu Hanifa on the Jahmis and Mujassima
34:17 Tafweed Maa'na - the way of the Salaf
35:05 Allah has NO modality (Kayf)
35:45 Allah has a Hand?
36:40 Imam Ahmed is free from Tajsim
38:09 Wahhabis are upon Muqatil ibn Sulayman
40:30 2 Hadith experts at the time of Imam Ahmed
41:23 #1 Harb al-Kirmani
43:26 Allah has a limit?
44:40 Aboveness of Allah according to the Salaf
46:20 #2 Uthman ad-Darimi
47:25 Affirming movement for Allah?
50:42 Ibn Asakir
52:20 Extremes among the Hanbalis
54:00 Ibn Shahin defending Imam Ahmed against extreme Hanbalis
55:13 Ibn Taymiyya is not upon the way of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal
56:11 Imam Al-Dhahabi criticising the literalists
59:00 Forbidden to say Allah descends with His Being
1:00:00 Just narrate the Hadith as it is
1:00:50 Ibn Kathir
1:01:20 How Salafis explain Istiwa (rising)
1:02:32 How Ibn Kathir explains Istiwa (rising)
1:06:00 Ibn Kathir refutes the literalists
1:08:18 Summarising the position of the Sunni Scholars
1:09:28 Imam al-Laqani (later Ash'ari)
1:10:32 Explaining Tawil and Tafweed
1:11:54 Conclusion
Assalamualaikum shaykh Upload a dars on aqeedah tahawiya
This is eye opening, I feel that I've been lied to by the salafis/najdis....
Wished I could like 10 times, good video Sheikh, keep more coming please, hopefully the humble ones will get educated.
So many Muslims including me have been deceived for years this is eye opening
Jake went from one extreme to another. He was a hadith rejector for almost a decade. He felt bad for rejecting the hadiths of the Prophet (saw). So,now he’s a complete literalist.
Who are you to question shaykh Jake 😂
He is a intelligent quranist and most importantly he had 3 meetings with uthmaan farooq at aim conferences
He is extremely qualified 😂
@@Ibi16extremely qualified just like iblees?
@@Ibi16 Extremely qualified like Iblees.
@@Ibi16😂😂😂😂
Too many Godlogic Wahabis Salafis nowadays.
Amazing breakdown sheikh, may Allah swt preserve you. ❤
وقفت صدفة على قناتكم ..ماشاء الله حجة قوية و علم جم .. وفقكم الله لنصرة مذهب اهل السنة الذي قل مناصروه في اللعة الانجلزية
List of some of the ulema who advocated for Tafweed in Siffat:
1) Imām Abū Ḥanīfah - Al-Fiqh-Al-Akbar pg 26/67
2) Imām Sufyān Thawrī - Al-ʿUlūw pg 146
3) Imām Mālik - Siyar Aʿlām al-Nubalāʾ V 8 pg 105
4) Imam Abdullah ibn Mubarak - Tirmidhi: chapter: Eternity of Ja-
hannum for its inhabitants
5) Imām Muḥammad ibn Ḥasan al-Shaybānī - Zamūt Taʾwīl pg 14
6) Imām Wakīʿ ibn Jarrāḥ - Ibid pg 20
7) Imām Sufyān ibn ʿUyaynah - Al-Iʿtiqād pg 118
8) Imām Shāiʿī - Lumaʿ al-Iʿtiqād pg 10
9) Imām ʿAbdullāh ibn Zubayr Humaydī - Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ v2 pg. 414
10) Imām Abū ʿUbayd (Qāsim ibn Sallām) - Sharḥ Iʿtiqād Ahl al-Sunnah v3 pg 526
11) Imām Yaḥyā ibn Maʿīn - Zamūt Taʾwīl pg 21
12) Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal - Zamūt Taʾwīl pg 21
Names won't get you anywhere.
What did Imam Malik say? Did he make tafwid of the ma'ana? Everyone knows his state istawa Ma'lum wa kafiya majhul. Is this tafwid bil ma'ana.
You either don't understand or slandering or both
@DAWAHTIME1 go learn your Deen and stop making silly comments!
@abyrahman6610 same can be said about you silly boy
@abyrahman6610 copy pasting and unable to understand and answer. Resorts to silliness himself
@@DAWAHTIME1 what did Ibn Hajr (RA) say regarding the statement of Imam Malik (RA)?
ما شاء الله بارك الله فيك شيخ
Keep putting out content like this
MashAllah, This vedio helped me a lot brother, may Allah increase your knowledge.
Please keep up with the videos. We need more representation of traditional ashari sunnis
The thing is Jake needs to get checked in person. He doesn’t have the qualifications to be discussing these topics. He’s above his pay grade. If you notice, he doesn’t ever mention who his shuyūkh are who taught him nor does he display Arabic comprehension to know what is actually being said. We live in a time where people give too much weight to these figures and fund their misguidance while they enjoy their life in Morocco.
19:29 Any sincere Salafi should watch the points made here, and the conditions of Tafwid and Taweel in different schools
I knew Jake was going into the extreme a long time ago. Jake's specialty is Trinity vs Tawheed and not the Islamic sciences.
Thats not what Jake went to school for.
Barak-Allahu-fiik shaykh. This really put everything into context and the reality of the matter to sleep. فمن شاء فاليؤمن ومن شاء فاليكفر
Beautiful explanation ❤
Jazakallah khair ❤
May Allah bless you bro.❤❤❤
MashaAllah, may Allah ﷻ be pleased with you.
Tho, this may be a little bit too much for the layman Jake :)
Just a suggestion shaykh, maybe you could cut up the video in different parts. A hour long video with a lot of different masa'il is a lot to consume, nevertheless, I am going to watch it all lol. barakallah fik
slm 3lykm. I came into Islam alhamdulillah through the dawah of atharis. Hence, I found myself inclined to the athari position as I learned. The "word for word" approach of Imam ibn Hanbal resonated with me, especially coming from a Christian background where people are well-known to read their own words into their scripture.
At the same time, I never understood the claim that this (ibn Hanbal's) approach was synonymous with applying some sort of "literal meaning", especially when it comes to ayaat which are ambiguous. It seems to me that a literal meaning, sometimes can only come from interpretation of the words to begin with. But maybe I'm wrong.
I wouldn't consider myself an Ashari, and at the same time I wouldn't consider the views of the Asharis on MANY topics to be far from how I understand things already. I've learned alot from you, so thank you for sharing your research with us very minor students of knowledge.
barakAllahu fik.
I know one thing Asharis are (shafii,maliki, Hanbeli) Maturidies are (Hanafi)
4 madhab for Amal( action,deeds).
2 madhab for Aqeedah (Beliefs).
Those are Ahlul sunnah Wal Jemaa.
Atharies are Neo Khawarij/Salafis Ahlul bidaa.
what about the people before Ashari and Maturidi?
Don't forget the Hanbali theological school
@trappedinexistence
Were sahaba time . I also mention Hanafi which is tabi'in.
Those madzhab are follower of Rasulillah and his companion(sahaba).
We are calling them Ahlul sunnah wal jamaa.
Out of 73 sects (sava'idul Adzam) Firqa'i Najiya the main road.
others is Ahlul bidaa.( Mujassima,Mushabbiya,Mutazila,Murjiaa,shia, etc.)
Neo Khawarij nowadays the calling themselves salafi which covering Khawarij aqeedah but they dont Real salafis they are Neo Khawarij/Wahabism movement which defently Ahlul bidaa.
@ph0uad
I also mentioned Hanbeli nowadays Hanbeli divided in two one of them Ashari which okay.
The other one is athari/Neo Khawarij Wahabism which is Ahlul bidaa.
@@BESIKTASON I know that modern salafis are misguided. they reject classical sunni scholars on too many issues which takes them out of sunni orthodoxy. the editing of classical works is another issue (eg. tafseer ibn kathir darussalam version is missing things the najdis don't like).
my question is, how can you call pre-ashari/maturidi people ashari/maturidi? that doesn't make sense. the first communities were neither of them until scholars had to come up with those views. it's like calling the havariyoon trinitarian or marcian when those views came much later.
جزاك الله خيرا شيخ
Quljaa’al haqq wazahaqal baadhila, innal baadhila kana zahuqqa. Allahu Akbar Alhamdulilah wa shukr lillah
JazakAllahu khair
Jake The MetaMujasim.
😀😀
😮
I don't take jake serious at all, his full of hate and needs to work on himself.
"We affirm the apparent.." is such a deception. They do Ta'wil when it pleases them because it's ambiguous on what they mean by "apparent". Example 54:14, where they say it means 'two eyes'.
Baqallani didn't affirm 'two eyes', he used the dual form with 'eye' and 'eyes' by each of the 2 attributes being distinct as he did with yadayn('two hands") as one attribute.
Because two eyes in Arabic appears no where in the Quran or sunna. Look it up. Prove where two eyes are explicitly mentioned.
here is the full Arabic text of Surah Al-Qamar 54:12-14:
**12.**
وَفَجَّرْنَا الْأَرْضَ عُيُونًا فَالْتَقَى الْمَاءُ عَلَىٰ أَمْرٍ قَدَرٍ
**13.**
وَحَمَلْنَاهُ عَلَىٰ ذَاتِ أَلْوَاحٍ وَدُسُرٍ
**14.**
تَجْرِي بِأَعْيُنِنَا جَزَاءً لِمَنْ كَانَ كُفِرَ
أَعْيُن (ʾa‘yun): This is the plural form of عَيْن (ʿayn), which means "eye". The form "أَعْيُن" is a broken plural (جمع تكسير), often used for words referring to body parts or objects.
نَا (nā): This is a possessive suffix (ضمير المتكلمين), meaning "our" or "ours". So, "أَعْيُنِنَا" means "our eyes."
@@mohammedhanif6780 so where does the word *two* eyes appear in the Quran or Sunnah? Looking for this word: عينان
@@a9317u do i say it does?
@ yes Jake and Ibn Taymiyyah do say that
May Allaah guide this brother and other brothers from the guidance of the ashaa'irah.
43:50 read Radd Ala Jahmiyyah by Imam Ahmad he gave us Evidences that Allah is separate from his creation
Masha Allah. Bro destroyed Our time Mujesimah
Thank you barrakallahu fik
The sons of Karramiyyah if they don't slander the Imams of Ahlul Sunnah nobody will listen to them
Jake became a complete wahhabitard, I hope he's getting paid well otherwise he's making himself look dumb for no reason 😂😂😂
Babe, new jake the sake muslim grifter demolition video just dropped.
We call him Jake the metajahil
Allah has the Attribute of "YAD", Not hand.
Sir my one and only simple question... With what authority you take meaning of hand, eyes, face and shin to be metaphorical/simile.
DO you have any explicitly injunctions from prophet alihisalam or his companions that his nuzul or other sifaat which came in Quran and sunnah are to be taken metaphorically
In regards to the hadith of Bukhari and Muslim wherein the attribute of Allah ‘dhik (literal meaning: laughing)’ has been mentioned, Imam Bukhari is quoted as saying that it means, “Allah’s mercy.” (Bayhaqi, Kitab al-Asma’ wa ‘l-Sifat, p: 433).
In Surat al-Qalam, Allah Most High says, “On the Day when the saq [literal meaning: shin] will be exposed…”. (Qur’an 68:42). Likewise, in the hadith of Bukhari, it is stated, “Our Lord will expose his saq [literal meaning: shin].” Many scholars from the salaf and khalaf; such as Abdullah ibn Abbas, Mujahid and Qatada interpret the term ‘saq’ with various different explanations. (See: Imam al-
Bayhaqi’s Al-Asma’ wa ‘l-Sifat, p: 323).
Imam Ibn Kathir (Allah have mercy on him) relates in his masterpiece Al-Bidaya wa ‘l-Nihaya quoting Imam al-Bayhaqi from his Manaqib through a sound chain that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Allah have mercy on him) interpreted the verse, “And your Lord shall come” (Qur’an 89:22) to
mean, “His recompense (thawab) shall come.’ (Al-Bidaya wa ‘l-Nihaya, 10/327)
@abyrahman6610 Salafis says "we must take whatever is revealed as it is and should not invest the human intellect in deducting the True nature or kayfiyah of Asma o sifaat. They say we leave the actual meaning onto Allah and only accept whatever is written without going into it's Howness but WHEREAS JAHMIS, ASHARIS AND MATURIDIS MATURIDIS ATTRIBUTE ALLAH WITH THIER OWN WHIMS OF WHATEVER THEY THINKS FIT"
So, how would you respond to this
@@ahlussuffiya4225 As I understand, Asharis/ Maturidis accept the apparent words, not the apparent meanings. They consign the meanings to Allah (SWT).i.e. they believe in the revealed words as and that they have a meaning but only Allah (SWT) knows the meanings. Whereas the Salafis say they know the meanings (which are the literal meanings) but don't know the howness. Salafis are in fact going one step further by giving the literal meanings and therefore not stopping where Allah (SWT) and his Prophet (SAW) stopped at. These words should just be recited and not explained and not translated, that's the way of the Salaf.
Ibn abbas did taweel on shin of Allah. Easy to find do some searching.
Brother it’s simple the Najdis say it’s a real hand. Where in the Quran Sunnah does it say real/haqiqi and when you ask for an explanation they say we know what a hand is 😢
Lol Imam Harb Al Kirmani and Imam Ad Darimi both are students of Imam Ahmad😂 so the Ashairah believes Students of Ahmad are Mujassima?😂 I never saw Asharis criticising Bishr Al Marisi
I used to believe in this salafi nonesense. Alhamdulilah Allah guided me away from it into the real tradition and position of imam Ahmad ibn hanbal. It's a hard skin to shed wallahi this poison called salafiyyah
Alhamdulilah I am now teaching my family the misguidance we were on and to make real taqleed of imam Ahmad in fiqh and to follow the real books of aqeedah in the madhab and to throw away that garbage called kitab al tawheed
Please don't fast forward videos
+1
It’s not fast forwarded? only the first min intro is
@@a9317u and jake's part too
There is no justice between the Salafis and the Ashaaira. Instead of going to the narrations of the salaf, they will make hour long lectures quoting the khalaf. This brother here is banging on about the salaf being majority Tafwid proponents, while none of the Ashaaira were Tafwid only. So basically his whole lecture refutes the Ashaa'ira along with the Salafis. If the majority of the salaf did Tafwid, then why are we following Ta'wil. Why will the Ashaaira not stick the majority of salaf and stick with Tafwid. Why?
Go a step further. You will find tafwid and tawil very early on but not to an extreme. When one goes to extremes one falls into error. May Allah help us
Brother salafi is not mujasima but Ahlal hadith
The Wahhabis believe that Allah has a size, form, and location. The Sunnis regard such a belief as tajseem (object worship).
Yes they are, they believe Allah has literal foot and 5 fingers, no one who is right in his mind believes that.
Wahhabis are not Ahl al-Hadith. They did not contribute to the field of Hadith like the Ash'ariyyah. Let's be for real.
Ask them about hands , eyes , feet, ...the honest ones will say a real , literal foot ...or they may some what else is hand other than a hand . Beware some are sneaky and will play with words . May Allah help us. Not that the other side is perfect but you would be shocked by statements of their famous scholars and things hidden in their books.
Sheikh, how do you explain Quran 40:36 and 40:37, where Pharaoh instructed Haman to build a tower so that he can look into the God of Moses because he thinks Moses is a liar?
Is this not clear proof that Allah is above the heavens and the throne as this is what Musa preached to Pharaoh?
I just say that Allah is literally above the throne befitting his Majesty.
You have simply been brainwashed by the Najdi/wahhabi sect
@@ImranKhan-pn4lf
Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh in all his igno-rance, thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh.
Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing His Path. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety and not by distance like pharoah thinks.
@@ImranKhan-pn4lf
Pharaoh lanatulahi alayh in all his i.g.n.o-ra.n.c.e, thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh.
Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing the path of guidance that leads to Allh. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety towatds him, and not by distance like pharoah. thinks.
Pharaoh LA thought that he could reach Allah SWT by building a tower in to the heavens. It is not permissible to take Aqeedah from Pharaoh.
Rather take the Aqeedah of Khalilullah Ibrahim PBUH when he said : " He (Ibrahim) said: "I will go to my Lord! He will surely guide me" (Q37:99). Ibrahim PBUH understood that reaching Allah SWT is by pursuing His Path of Guidance. He understood that proximity to Allah is by obedience and piety, and not by distance like the pharoah's thinks.
@ Thank you for your response but I am not convinced with that explanation. Pharaoh wouldn’t have attempted to see Allah SWT if Musa hadn’t said that Allah is above the heavens. This is aqeedah of Musa AS.
37:99 (Quran) has nothing to do with refuting Allah being above the throne.
on snap im a naql head
9:00
The apparent meaning is understanding the text as it came, without knowing the reality, not reinterpreting it because you're insecure about what your greek-studied buddies will call you. We don't care for the labels you give Muslims who have this methodology [Imam abu hanifa, Imam malik, Imam Ahmad etc] because this methodology is authentic to the righteous generations.
Jake doesn't need to include in the quote he gave anything from before this part of the book because the other part is completely irrelevant. You implied that he skipped it and as a result *missed some serious important context*... Okay, well show us, tell us, tell us what Jake had missed from the quote that would change the message. Because as it stands, what you just did seems more like charlatanry.
You didn’t watch the video. Imam Abu Hanifa and all the imams including Imam Ahmed are not upon the modern Salafi movement which is the greatest Bida
Salafi/Wahhabi Takfiri Jihadie Ideology mentality propagandist.
So you agree that you worship a god just like Hindus worshipping vishnu krishna etc.. Even they too have some saught of hands, eyes, face and shin. So you agree that you are an anthrmorphist... So you agree that you worship an entity which has two physical hands that too both on right side in an ugly manner, and who is limited by just two physical literal eyes, uncovers his shin by lifting his garments and who continously does ding dong ding dong.. Up and down motion (Nouzbillah min zalik) and finally all his hands, eyes, body everything will be perished except face... Wow.. What a cinamatic literal god you have.. Congrats then you are no different than a Hindu now
Show me one Athar where these Imams you claim interpreted the ambiguous attributes of Allah in the literal meaning. Show me one because there are countless evidence the Salaf only practising tafwidh and tawil. Literal interpretation is a form of interpretation and the path of the Mujassimah. Avoiding searching a meaning is tafwidh al-ma'na. You are contradicting yourself and sound ignorant.
Saying you accept the apparent but then making an interpretation that the apparent doesn’t exist and there is no meaning to it isn’t accepting it without interpretation.
Its the complete opposite and worse.
So Asharis basically believe in a Holy Ghost?
Good try kid ibn Taymiya affirmed Holy Ghost son father to god go ask ur ulama too Christians found out on social media used it against Muslim recently
We don’t believe in an idol or a superman god
@ sounds like you guys don’t believe in any god just like atheism
@@Unknown.855seriously wake up now you’re just being foolish. You know that’s not what we believe, it’s what you wish we believe, so you don’t have to concede that your beliefs are corrupted.
What makes you say that? Please explain.
َ
[تكفير الأعيان عند السَّلف وأتباعهم]³
قال الإمام الدارمي -رحمه اللّٰه- في [ردّه على المريسي]:
"وَهَذَا كُفرٌ مَعقُولٌ لَا يُحتَاجُ فِيهِ إلى أَثَرٍ وَلَا خَبَرٍ، كَمَا لَو أنّ رَجُلًا ادَّعَى أنّ مُلكَ اللَّهِ وَسُلطَانَهُ وَقُدرَتَهُ وَعِلمَهُ، وَمَشِيئَتَهُ، وَإِرَادَتَهُ، وَوَجهَهُ، وَسَمعَهُ وَبَصَرَهُ وَيَدَيهِ، أنّ شَيئًا مِنهَا مَخْلُوقٌ.
قِيلَ لَهُ: كَفَرتَ وَكَذَبتَ، بَل كُلُّهَا غَيرُ مَخلُوقٍ".
The same person who said:
"Had Allah willed, He would have settled on the back of a mosquito"
11:33
Plain text reading of Quran leads to tajsim(!) ie something sinful
I think it is your categorisation of sins that's the problem, not the plain text reading
Just as you, with your pseudo rational idea of temporality entailing createdness, are forced to say Allah does not act temporally, despite the Quran explicitly showing that He does (created jinn before mankind) and early scholars like Bukhari affirming uncreated temporality for Allah.
Truly i tell you that the problem is with your categories of heresy/sin
Allah does not have a body, nor is He created, nevertheless Allah has 2 hands [as affirmed by Abul Hasan al ashari, Abu Hanifa, Al Tabari etc] and acts temporally. We hear and we obey
"uncreated temporality for Allah" is this temporality different from our?
@@abdulkenyseid8108 Yes, just as the mercy of Allah is different to our mercy [created mercy]
Bukhari affirmed temporality for Allah saying His new occurrences aren't like that of creation's (they are uncreated). I follow captain Bukhari
@@idrea43 you will not get any problem with Allah's mercy just by claiming it is indivisible(not a collection of mercies) from Allah. but temporality is different topic.
@@abdulkenyseid8108 That's your claim, not mine or Bukhari's. We dont have a problem with this positon
11:19
Do you know how ridiculous you sound
"may Allah curse you for taking the Quran, that's revealed with an apparent meaning and no interpretation given, upon its apparent meaning! Here, take these ta'weeli interpretations that we have derived from our own minds without any prophetic/divine authority instead!"
Who gets to decide which interpretation is the incorrect kufri one and which isn't? You say your supposedly rational scholars [whose conclusions seem to have been inspired by a deep seated insecurity from dealing with non muslims], we say the Quran itself. When it says He rose over the throne, it means what it's saying, while the howness is unimaginable. In howness it is transcendent, not in meaning.
Tanzih is slightly more respectable, but it's still illegitimate at times. How can you say Allah is entirely transcendent, when the prophet himself compares the meaning of the mercy of Allah to the mercy of a woman with a child (saying Allah has more mercy)? The meanings can certainly be known.
How can you say Allah is entirely transcendent, when the prophet himself gestures with his hand what Allah will do to the heaven and earth with His hand? Clenching and unclenching it. The meanings can certainly be known
Salafi/ Wahhabi Takfiri Jihadie Ideology mentality propagandist.
Narration of Certain Ahadith:
Someone said, “What about one who narrates the hadith, ‘Allah created
Adam on His form,’ and that ‘Allah will unveil His shank on the Day of
Resurrection,’ and that ‘He will put His hand into Jahannam and bring
whomever He wills out of it’,” and he [Malik] rejected them strenuously, and forbade anyone to narrate them. Someone said, “Ibn ‘Ijlan
has narrated it.” He said, “He was not one of the people of fiqh.” Malik
did not reject the hadith of ‘descent' nor the hadith of ‘laughter’. Someone said, “What about the hadith that ‘the Throne shook because of the
death of Sa’d’?” He said, “It should not be narrated, and what call has a man to narrate that when he sees what danger it contains?” ...Kitab Al Jami'
So you agree that you worship a god just Hindus worshipping vishnu krishna etc.. Even they too have some saught of hands, eyes, face and shin. So you agree that you are an anthrmorphist... So you agree that worship a entity which has two physical hands that too both on right side in an ugly manner, and who is limited by just two physical literal eyes, uncovers his shin by lifting his garments and who continously does ding dong ding dong.. Up and down motion (Nouzbillah min zalik) and finally all his hands, eyes, body everything will be perished except face... Wow.. What a cinamatic literal god you have.. Congrats then you are no different than a Hindu now
Salam alaykum Shiek jazzakallah. Why don’t you discuss with Jake and refute him live to cut the nonsense of the najdis from the source?
So you’re telling us that you don’t interpret the verses that give attributes to Allah?
The salaf avoided interpretating it. Follow them and not the Wahhabis.
@ the wahabis don’t interpret them, the asharis do.
@@jarirmuthana5642Ash’aris made Tafweed and leave the meaning to Allah. Wahhabis and Ibn taymiyyah believe Tafweed is Bida.
@@a9317u no they don’t they reject everything and give their own interpretation